Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
_______________
**
September 2011.
***
August 2011.
* THIRD DIVISION.
368
368
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014eb4b09d580651c30d000a0094004f00ee/p/AML752/?username=Guest
Page 1 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
without reason, to file the appellants brief before the CA. He failed,
in short, to exert his utmost ability and to give his full commitment
to maintain and defend Antonios right. Antonio, by choosing Atty.
Ireneo to represent him, relied upon and reposed his trust and
confidence on the latter, as his counsel, to do whatsoever was legally
necessary to protect Antonios interest, if not to secure a favorable
judgment. Once they agree to take up the cause of a client, lawyers,
regardless of the importance of the subject matter litigated or
financial arrangements agreed upon, owe fidelity to such cause and
should always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed on
them. And to add insult to injury, Atty. Ireneo appeared not to have
taken any effort to personally apprise Antonio of the dismissal of
the appeal, however personally embarrassing the cause for the
dismissal might have been. As mentioned earlier, Antonio came to
know about the outcome of his appeal only after his wife took the
trouble of verifying the case status when she came to Manila. By
then, all remedies had been lost. It must be remembered that a
retained counsel is expected to serve the client with
competence and diligence. This duty includes not merely
reviewing the cases entrusted to the counsels care and giving the
client sound legal advice, but also properly representing the client
in court, attending scheduled hearings, preparing and filing
required pleadings, prosecuting the handled cases with
reasonable dispatch, and urging their termination without waiting
for the client or the court to prod him or her to do so. The lawyer
should not be sitting idly by and leave the rights of the client in a
state of uncertainty.
Same; Same; Negligence; The failure to file a brief resulting in
the dismissal of an appeal constitutes inexcusable negligence.The
failure to file a brief resulting in the dismissal of an appeal
constitutes inexcusable negligence. This default translates to a
violation of the injunction of Canon 18, Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility, respectively providing: CANON
18 A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH
COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE. x x x x Rule 18.03 A lawyer
shall not neglect a matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable. Rule 18.04 A
lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and
shall respond within a reasonable time to the clients request for
information.
369
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014eb4b09d580651c30d000a0094004f00ee/p/AML752/?username=Guest
Page 2 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
369
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014eb4b09d580651c30d000a0094004f00ee/p/AML752/?username=Guest
Page 3 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
370
prosecuted for public welfare and it does not involve private interest
and affords no redress for private grievance.The prayer for
damages cannot be granted. Let alone the fact that Antonio chose
not to file his position paper before the IBP-CBD and, therefore,
was unable to satisfactorily prove his claim for damages, a
proceeding for disbarment or suspension is not in any sense a civil
action; it is undertaken and prosecuted for public welfare. It does
not involve private interest and affords no redress for private
grievance.
Page 4 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
371
Page 5 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
372
Page 6 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
373
Page 7 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
374
Page 8 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
375
Page 9 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
376
Page 10 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
377
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014eb4b09d580651c30d000a0094004f00ee/p/AML752/?username=Guest
Page 11 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
378
Page 12 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
379
Page 13 of 14
7/22/15, 3:46 PM
country.
SO ORDERED.
Peralta, Abad, Villarama, Jr.** and Mendoza, JJ.,
concur.
Atty. Ireneo Aredonia, Jr. suspended from practice of law
for one (1) year for inexcusable negligence, attempting to
mislead the appellate court, misuse of Court processes and
willful disobedience to lawful orders of the Court, with
warning against repetition of similar acts.
Note.When a lawyer accepts to handle a case,
whether for a fee or gratis et amore, he undertakes to give
his utmost attention, skill and competence to it, regardless
of its significance. (Ceniza vs. Rubia, 602 SCRA 1 [2009])
o0o
http://central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000014eb4b09d580651c30d000a0094004f00ee/p/AML752/?username=Guest
Page 14 of 14